What was that ford that bond was driving in Casino Royale? That was another nice looking ford that will never see the light of day here.

But hey! We did get the Contour! That's European.

 

Bond drove the new Mondeo (the European version of the Contour) while in the Bahamas. In my opinion, Casino Royale was as good as the early Connery films and better than any Bond film made after 1969.

 

That's the new Mondeo? Well, I might have to retract my Contour slam if they bring that thing over. Nice looking family car.

I agree too, great movie.

 

Many hope that Ford will use the same platforms for its next generation small and mid size cars in Europe and North America. Some speculate, based upon statements from Alan Mullaly, that the next generation Fusion will use the next generation EUCD platform used by the Mondeo and various Volvos.

 

It's one of those very rare Bond movies that people who aren't Bond fans will see.

It goes back to the basics, and is the only Bond movie since "Diamonds are Forever" that doesn't rely on some tacky special effects, and perhaps the ONLY Bond movie ever that doesn't rely on some type of gimick that streaches the imagination.

BTW: I agree that the new Mondeo looks great. Ford yanking it from the US was IMHO a big mistake.

 

That car look awesome. I was very impressed. I think it looked better than the Fusion (which I really like). Great movie too.

can anyone read German? http://www.autosieger.de/article11029.html

 

There are large parts of the U.S. where it also doesn't snow. California
has nearly twice as many people as Australia, and then you can add Arizona, Texas, and Florida.

It's too bad Ford doesn't try selling Australian-style cars in the sunny states.

 

I live in upstate NY and one year I counted only 7 days where I would not have been able to drive by Camaro SS because of too much snow/ice on roads. Most people keep nice cars off the road because of the salt and sand used on roads. I'd drive a CTS or BMW year round if I had one. The State Troopers seem to have no trouble with there RWD Crown Vics and 2wd Tahoes

 

Yes.

That's why it almost makes my skin crawl when another post appears about how someone "needs" FWD "for the northeast" in the winter because RWD is dangerous. The idea is silly and doesn't hold up to even a moment's thought.

1. It doesn't snow every day in the winter.

2. The days you can't drive on public roads in the northeast are rare, and even then, FWD is no help. Ice will make all vehicles slide, and deep snow will make anything besides a 4WD truck stranded.

3. In all debates on the subject, seems the invention called snow tires is forgotten.

4. The reason some RWD cars are unmanageable is because the only RWD cars on the market today in any quanity have big fat performance tires... the absolute worse tires to have on snow... even "all season" ones.

5. Finally, the point that people in the northeast, especially older people, don't buy RWD cars is disproven being that most retail Crown Vics, Mercury Grand Marquis, and Town cars are sold in the region versus the rest of the country, and Chrysler 300 is doing as well there as the rest of the country. Mercedes & BMWs aren't scarce there either.


The point you bring out nails it. People don't bring out their Camaros or other special cars in the winter because of salt and cender used on the roads. My relatives did, & my dad did back when his '77 Caprice was still new.

Before someone points out where I currently live, I grew up in Pennsylvania, learned to drive in the hills (including snowy ice covered hills) of Pittsburgh, and have made frequent trips from here to Reno (including in the winter) in a rear drive Mustang, Camaro, and Thunderbird.

 

Okay, so what did you do those seven days that you couldn't drive the SS? What if that was your main/only car?

For the most part I do agree with you - RWD in snow is possible. My dad drove his Z/28 through some pretty nasty Western Massachusetts winters. But he would be the first to tell you it wasn't pretty. He put on billzaks, sandbags in back, and there were still some days when he was having a rough time going 10 mph. In contrast, my mom (by most accounts an inferior driver) was able to trod through in relative ease with the GP GTP. And that was with the horrible Eagle R-SA's.

Again, not saying it's impossible. My dad drives a Charger now, and I wouldn't hesitate on a RWD'er. But I still think we're a special breed. I'd bet most drivers will accept understeer and nose heaviness in return for those seven days and whatever extra bad-weather safety they can get. The translation is that there will always be a market for those mid-size fwd'ers.

 

That is perfectly right. Another reason people will use to put down RWD in the snow is 2wd pickups with nothing in the bed, no limited slip (the G80 is awesome) and all seasons that are not brand new.

No one compares apples to apples. A V6 Charger with LSD will do just as good as a FWD Impala. Everyone likes to compare muscle cars and 2WD non-LSD pickups to FWD 4 cyl. sedans. I tell most my friends that you throw 4 snow tires (under 245mm wide) on just about any car an it will do just fine for those 6" of snow days. Once you get over 9" of snow it doesn't matter since most car don't have the ground clearance and will bottom out.

I see a lot of Chargers, CTS and 300s around. Many other RWD cars are expensive and the owners can afford to buy a used SUV for winter hence you don't see them. A lot of the new RWD cars are 50/50 which helps a lot too.

If the SS was my only car I would have had to dump the 186mph-rated 275mm wide tires in favor of some 235mm snow tires. Then the only issue would have been ground clearance in those spots were the plows didn't get or the driveways they pushed in front of. Having a torque monster engine doesn't always help in slick road either.

 

You're missing the point. It's all about perception. The majority of consumers believe you can't use a RWD car in the winter, and if that's what they believe, that's what's going to guide their automobile purchase. Same as how the majority of consumers perceive domestic cars to be unreliable POSs and go on to make the Camry the nation's best selling vehicle. So back to the original topic, Ford probably played it safe by offering their mainstream Freestyle with the most widely-accepted drive configuration. But to address some of your points:

1. It doesn't snow every day in the winter.

As dav305z said, what do you do when it does? People are afraid of winter for the days that it does snow, not the clear sunny days. So regardless of how many days it snows, it's those days that are going to guide their purchase.

3. In all debates on the subject, seems the invention called snow tires is forgotten.

That's true, but very few people use snow tires. For some reason they are under the impression that all-seasons work well in the winter when they really don't. So for the overwhelming majority that do not use snow tires (or can't afford to have two sets of tires), FWD is the clear choice

4. The reason some RWD cars are unmanageable is because the only RWD cars on the market today in any quanity have big fat performance tires... the absolute worse tires to have on snow... even "all season" ones.

This thread is about the Freestyle. I don't know what size tires it has, but even if it was RWD (like the Frontier), I'm sure they wouldn't be big fat performance ones.

5. Finally, the point that people in the northeast, especially older people, don't buy RWD cars is disproven being that most retail Crown Vics, Mercury Grand Marquis, and Town cars are sold in the region versus the rest of the country, and Chrysler 300 is doing as well there as the rest of the country. Mercedes & BMWs aren't scarce there either.

A lot of those northeastern Grand Marquis buyers are snowbirds that winter in Florida. And most BMW and Merc customers have more than one car, quite often a SUV of some description. Going back to the Freestyle buyer, it's most likely going to be their primary car so it has to be the best possible choice for any kind of weather. There's no option of taking the Escalade to work that day.

No it will not. We've had these debates on here before, but suffice it to say an Impala has more weight over its driven wheels and that's going to give it more traction to get going than a Charger. Once under way the dynamics of a RWD become more favourable, but when people think of a car's ability to deal with snow, they think of getting stuck getting out of their driveway or trying to climb a snowy hill, and a FWD wins that competition every time.

I learned on RWD and most of the cars in my life have been RWD. I grew up in an area that got a lot of bad winter storms. FWD was a godsend when my dad bought his first X-car.

 

Are you guys still talking about the Freestyle? My guess is that the average buyer (younger woman?) could care less which way drive it is, and it's cheaper to build them FWD.

 

Actually W-cars are really good in the snow since they are heavier and have that iron 3800 under the hood. Lets say LSD V6 Charger vs. 4 cyl midsize. I know of a lot of lighter cars that suck in the snow and suck at going up slippery hills. Civic is one of them. Weight distro and tires are important. And once you set the RWD to 50/50 and give it competitive winter tires that are not too wide the playing field gets leveled a little more. Add in Limited slip, Traction control, and stability control you have no reason to buy a FWD over RWD.

From a marketing stand point I think it is smart for cars like the STS, 300, and BMWs to offer the AWD option for those stuck in there old ways that still don't trust RWD

 

Regardless of the FWD/RWD in snow debate, there are more Americans living in snow-free, salt-free climates than there are Australians living in said climates. So why not make a car for them?

The Freestyle probably is cheaper to build than a Territory, but the Territory is in a different class, with much more powerful engines and that RWD style. Offer both and compete in both segments.